investor999 wrote:The custodian is SIPC protected. You'd still have your assets. They have a pretty good FAQ that you could ask them for. I was comfortable enough to give it a go. They are about 3 years old.

smitcat wrote:"Thought I would throw my two cents here on safe harbor 401k plans for small businesses. I am signing up for guideline.com safe harbor for my 6 employee S-Corp.
$40 per month or ($8.00 per employee)
They carry Fiduciary responsibility
3 bp AUM fee.
$500 setup fee
$1000 termination fee within first 2 years.
Access to Admiral Shares of most VG funds with no minimum. Also have some DFA, T.Rowe, etc.
I can't find the catch, would love someone else on the forum to find it! I have no relationship with the company other than soon to be a client."

It appears that you are limited to 8 predetermined plans - I may be wrong but that's what I get form the website so far.

artgerst wrote:Can someone explain to me why so many people mention Employee Fiduciary (and now guideline.com)? I'm asking from the perspective of someone with a company (S-Corp) who had used Vanguard at one point for our 401k, but then was turned away because we were too small (20 employees) so landed on TRowePrice because they charged nothing (initially or yearly) to the employer and employee and handles pretty much everything. Note that I am not promoting TRowePrice, but I feel like I'm missing something. I can see that these other companies allow you to use Vanguard funds (which I can understand that is the draw) or is it that TRowePrice has fees that I'm not noticing.

Art,

What are your AUM and Plan administration fees? Any per employee fees with TRowe? Dont know much about the TRO 401k and am curious.

What are your AUM and Plan administration fees? Any per employee fees with TRowe? Dont know much about the TRO 401k and am curious.

I feel silly saying this but I don't know for sure. I heard from them from the start that we are not paying any fees and there is no cost, but of course now I'm suspicious. I will call them Monday to find out and ask your specific questions. I can say that I know the company has not paid any one-time or yearly fee. I have access to all of the company plan documents but they are a tough read and I don't think I would see fees in there - or at least easily.

Not sure if you are suggesting a generic fees page. I don't think that will tell me. I assume the fees are somewhat plan-specific (assets, people, etc).

I have been searching further and I found lots of plan documents with a few documents related to fees. Of course they are rather confusing and I still need to talk with someone to ask specific questions. At this point it seems like there are no direct costs to the company - I still see all $0's on the invoices - and the asset based fees on the funds (e.g., .27% on S&P 500 fund) AND it looks like a .25% administrative fee additional, but I need to verify all of this.

Not sure if you are suggesting a generic fees page. I don't think that will tell me. I assume the fees are somewhat plan-specific (assets, people, etc).

I have been searching further and I found lots of plan documents with a few documents related to fees. Of course they are rather confusing and I still need to talk with someone to ask specific questions. At this point it seems like there are no direct costs to the company - I still see all $0's on the invoices - and the asset based fees on the funds (e.g., .27% on S&P 500 fund) AND it looks like a .25% administrative fee additional, but I need to verify all of this.

I would very much appreciate if you can list any fees once you figure it out.

Not sure if you are suggesting a generic fees page. I don't think that will tell me. I assume the fees are somewhat plan-specific (assets, people, etc).

I have been searching further and I found lots of plan documents with a few documents related to fees. Of course they are rather confusing and I still need to talk with someone to ask specific questions. At this point it seems like there are no direct costs to the company - I still see all $0's on the invoices - and the asset based fees on the funds (e.g., .27% on S&P 500 fund) AND it looks like a .25% administrative fee additional, but I need to verify all of this.

I would very much appreciate if you can list any fees once you figure it out.

+1 - I think there must be a $3k annual 5500 filing / administration fee tucked somewhere or someone would have suggested it by now over Emp Fiduciary.

Not sure if you are suggesting a generic fees page. I don't think that will tell me. I assume the fees are somewhat plan-specific (assets, people, etc).

I have been searching further and I found lots of plan documents with a few documents related to fees. Of course they are rather confusing and I still need to talk with someone to ask specific questions. At this point it seems like there are no direct costs to the company - I still see all $0's on the invoices - and the asset based fees on the funds (e.g., .27% on S&P 500 fund) AND it looks like a .25% administrative fee additional, but I need to verify all of this.

I would very much appreciate if you can list any fees once you figure it out.

+1 - I think there must be a $3k annual 5500 filing / administration fee tucked somewhere or someone would have suggested it by now over Emp Fiduciary.

smitcat wrote:"Thought I would throw my two cents here on safe harbor 401k plans for small businesses. I am signing up for guideline.com safe harbor for my 6 employee S-Corp.
$40 per month or ($8.00 per employee)
They carry Fiduciary responsibility
3 bp AUM fee.
$500 setup fee
$1000 termination fee within first 2 years.
Access to Admiral Shares of most VG funds with no minimum. Also have some DFA, T.Rowe, etc.
I can't find the catch, would love someone else on the forum to find it! I have no relationship with the company other than soon to be a client."

It appears that you are limited to 8 predetermined plans - I may be wrong but that's what I get form the website so far.

smitcat wrote:"Thought I would throw my two cents here on safe harbor 401k plans for small businesses. I am signing up for guideline.com safe harbor for my 6 employee S-Corp.
$40 per month or ($8.00 per employee)
They carry Fiduciary responsibility
3 bp AUM fee.
$500 setup fee
$1000 termination fee within first 2 years.
Access to Admiral Shares of most VG funds with no minimum. Also have some DFA, T.Rowe, etc.
I can't find the catch, would love someone else on the forum to find it! I have no relationship with the company other than soon to be a client."

It appears that you are limited to 8 predetermined plans - I may be wrong but that's what I get form the website so far.

smitcat wrote:"Thought I would throw my two cents here on safe harbor 401k plans for small businesses. I am signing up for guideline.com safe harbor for my 6 employee S-Corp.
$40 per month or ($8.00 per employee)
They carry Fiduciary responsibility
3 bp AUM fee.
$500 setup fee
$1000 termination fee within first 2 years.
Access to Admiral Shares of most VG funds with no minimum. Also have some DFA, T.Rowe, etc.
I can't find the catch, would love someone else on the forum to find it! I have no relationship with the company other than soon to be a client."

It appears that you are limited to 8 predetermined plans - I may be wrong but that's what I get form the website so far.

I am having a hard time posting the link because it is to a pdf. You can google "TRP 401k costs" and on the first page there is a link to "pdf - understanding the fees - T Rowe Price". The pdf is only two pages and is fairly easily read.
Here is another attempt at placing a link here, copy and paste it into your browser....

ERISA Stone wrote:Maybe guideline doesn't allow the new comparability method? I can't remember what it was but I laughed and politely ended the phone call when they told me it wasn't allowed under their plan.

I really like guideline's model on the surface but I don't think you have a lot of flexibility in plan design.

If a company with a 401k goes bankrupt the assets are protected because they should be separated from any company accounts.

I think you are being a little unrealistic to think that all TPA business models are going to offer all plan options available. The New Comparability Method is not exactly a requirement of the vast majority of plan sponsors. There is certainly a market for a TPAs to offer a simple low cost no frills safe harbor 401k plan to small businesses.

That is not to say I am endorsing them. They are fairly new and have only gained visibility on BH just this year. They do not yet have the longer track record of satisfied sponsors that Employee Fiduciary does.

ERISA Stone wrote:Maybe guideline doesn't allow the new comparability method? I can't remember what it was but I laughed and politely ended the phone call when they told me it wasn't allowed under their plan.

I really like guideline's model on the surface but I don't think you have a lot of flexibility in plan design.

If a company with a 401k goes bankrupt the assets are protected because they should be separated from any company accounts.

I think you are being a little unrealistic to think that all TPA business models are going to offer all plan options available. The New Comparability Method is not exactly a requirement of the vast majority of plan sponsors. There is certainly a market for a TPAs to offer a simple low cost no frills safe harbor 401k plan to small businesses.

That is not to say I am endorsing them. They are fairly new and have only gained visibility on BH just this year. They do not yet have the longer track record of satisfied sponsors that Employee Fiduciary does.

That's fair. And again, I like their business model. Streamlining the plan provisions allows you to hire less experienced consultants and allows those consultants to administer more plans because they don't have to constantly go back and review the plan document. It just wasn't for my 401k plan.

ERISA Stone wrote:Maybe guideline doesn't allow the new comparability method? I can't remember what it was but I laughed and politely ended the phone call when they told me it wasn't allowed under their plan.

I really like guideline's model on the surface but I don't think you have a lot of flexibility in plan design.

If a company with a 401k goes bankrupt the assets are protected because they should be separated from any company accounts.

I think you are being a little unrealistic to think that all TPA business models are going to offer all plan options available. The New Comparability Method is not exactly a requirement of the vast majority of plan sponsors. There is certainly a market for a TPAs to offer a simple low cost no frills safe harbor 401k plan to small businesses.

That is not to say I am endorsing them. They are fairly new and have only gained visibility on BH just this year. They do not yet have the longer track record of satisfied sponsors that Employee Fiduciary does.

That's fair. And again, I like their business model. Streamlining the plan provisions allows you to hire less experienced consultants and allows those consultants to administer more plans because they don't have to constantly go back and review the plan document. It just wasn't for my 401k plan.

I agree. I'm an early adopter, and I'm hoping the risk doesn't show up. The extra costs of EF and others elongated the benefit of just implementing a SIMPLE IRA, so it works for me.

I like the ROTH option that they give you. (For low income bracket years) Ubiquity and others don't provide that option without much higher costs.

"I agree. I'm an early adopter, and I'm hoping the risk doesn't show up. The extra costs of EF and others elongated the benefit of just implementing a SIMPLE IRA, so it works for me."

Dependent upon the funds that you want and/or pick and the balances in those funds the differences in costs can go either way.
I think it prudent to figure out what funds you want to have available, then see which companies support those choices, after that you can use the existing fee structure to simulate what the total fees will be with your intended balances. Always remember that fees are collected in various ways and simulate your situation in order to figure the best fit.

ERISA Stone wrote:Maybe guideline doesn't allow the new comparability method? I can't remember what it was but I laughed and politely ended the phone call when they told me it wasn't allowed under their plan.

I really like guideline's model on the surface but I don't think you have a lot of flexibility in plan design.

If a company with a 401k goes bankrupt the assets are protected because they should be separated from any company accounts.

I think you are being a little unrealistic to think that all TPA business models are going to offer all plan options available. The New Comparability Method is not exactly a requirement of the vast majority of plan sponsors. There is certainly a market for a TPAs to offer a simple low cost no frills safe harbor 401k plan to small businesses.

That is not to say I am endorsing them. They are fairly new and have only gained visibility on BH just this year. They do not yet have the longer track record of satisfied sponsors that Employee Fiduciary does.

That's fair. And again, I like their business model. Streamlining the plan provisions allows you to hire less experienced consultants and allows those consultants to administer more plans because they don't have to constantly go back and review the plan document. It just wasn't for my 401k plan.

I agree. I'm an early adopter, and I'm hoping the risk doesn't show up. The extra costs of EF and others elongated the benefit of just implementing a SIMPLE IRA, so it works for me.

I like the ROTH option that they give you. (For low income bracket years) Ubiquity and others don't provide that option without much higher costs.

For me, the risk is calculated and makes sense for my situation.

Do you know how many clients they serve and total funds they manage?

I was given the following link by a competitor, which says they only have 26 clients and only a little over $120k total they manage. I'm pretty sure that's wrong, I will inquire when I call them.

I wouldn't be surprised if that is true. We have only really started hearing about them on BH for the last few months. So maybe 2017 is the start of their real rollout.

I wouldn't necessarily let that stop me. I would want references from another sponsor who has been with them at least six months. I would want to know how the adoption went, onboarding process for employees and last year's Form 5500 submission.

New companies have to start somewhere and some plan sponsors have to be early adopters. Maybe that makes you uneasy, but we need competition in the small 401k plan marketplace. Otherwise, small businesses are going to be stuck with SIMPLE IRAs as their only option.

ERISA Stone wrote:Maybe guideline doesn't allow the new comparability method? I can't remember what it was but I laughed and politely ended the phone call when they told me it wasn't allowed under their plan.

I really like guideline's model on the surface but I don't think you have a lot of flexibility in plan design.

If a company with a 401k goes bankrupt the assets are protected because they should be separated from any company accounts.

I think you are being a little unrealistic to think that all TPA business models are going to offer all plan options available. The New Comparability Method is not exactly a requirement of the vast majority of plan sponsors. There is certainly a market for a TPAs to offer a simple low cost no frills safe harbor 401k plan to small businesses.

That is not to say I am endorsing them. They are fairly new and have only gained visibility on BH just this year. They do not yet have the longer track record of satisfied sponsors that Employee Fiduciary does.

That's fair. And again, I like their business model. Streamlining the plan provisions allows you to hire less experienced consultants and allows those consultants to administer more plans because they don't have to constantly go back and review the plan document. It just wasn't for my 401k plan.

I agree. I'm an early adopter, and I'm hoping the risk doesn't show up. The extra costs of EF and others elongated the benefit of just implementing a SIMPLE IRA, so it works for me.

I like the ROTH option that they give you. (For low income bracket years) Ubiquity and others don't provide that option without much higher costs.

For me, the risk is calculated and makes sense for my situation.

Do you know how many clients they serve and total funds they manage?

I was given the following link by a competitor, which says they only have 26 clients and only a little over $120k total they manage. I'm pretty sure that's wrong, I will inquire when I call them.

I took a quick look at this, and it was their original application. Likely from 2015. I believe I asked them this question and the numbers were far higher. I'd check with them directly. I figure they've now had 2 or 3 tax seasons of 5500 with their platform, which I think is fine for a small company for me. I use the founders other product too, so I have some confidence in this new venture. He created "TaskRabbit" which is very popular here in NYC.

Would I love to find someone on this board who uses them? Yes - But I may be the first and will report back end of the summer.

"I agree. I'm an early adopter, and I'm hoping the risk doesn't show up. The extra costs of EF and others elongated the benefit of just implementing a SIMPLE IRA, so it works for me."

For guidline.com - can you please share what your epected costs will be total from them?
The total costs incuding yearly, per member , AUM ,and any fund fees thorugh 12-b.
How did this compare to the full fees for other low cost 401K providers such as EF?

smitcat wrote:"I agree. I'm an early adopter, and I'm hoping the risk doesn't show up. The extra costs of EF and others elongated the benefit of just implementing a SIMPLE IRA, so it works for me."

For guidline.com - can you please share what your epected costs will be total from them?
The total costs incuding yearly, per member , AUM ,and any fund fees thorugh 12-b.
How did this compare to the full fees for other low cost 401K providers such as EF?

EF was far far higher, I checked with them, captain401k, Ubiquity, Vanguard, and one other. They were all far far more expensive (multitudes) on the Yearly fees, and some didn't offer Roth 401k. Exact pricing for them is on their website.

I am sure guideline will raise prices once a bigger contender in the field.

So do they have any 12 b fees on the Funds you will be utilizing like the Admiral VG funds?
Without any further fees it looks like you will have $40 yearly plus 0.03 AUM fee (you and employees)
Did you mean to say 0.03% or is it 0.03AUM?

Not sure if you are suggesting a generic fees page. I don't think that will tell me. I assume the fees are somewhat plan-specific (assets, people, etc).

I have been searching further and I found lots of plan documents with a few documents related to fees. Of course they are rather confusing and I still need to talk with someone to ask specific questions. At this point it seems like there are no direct costs to the company - I still see all $0's on the invoices - and the asset based fees on the funds (e.g., .27% on S&P 500 fund) AND it looks like a .25% administrative fee additional, but I need to verify all of this.

I would very much appreciate if you can list any fees once you figure it out.

+1 - I think there must be a $3k annual 5500 filing / administration fee tucked somewhere or someone would have suggested it by now over Emp Fiduciary.

Looks like it's better than I thought. My company has paid no fees (setup or yearly) and we don't even have an extra 25 basis points added - that is really an internal recordkeeping item whereas that 25 basis points comes out of the regular basis points charged on each fund (e.g., what "everyone" pays - like 27 basis points on the S&P fund). I confirmed all of this. We also pay nothing for filing and compliance.

The important notes here are that we did have about 20 employees when we started with money already rolled in from a former 401k and also we started several years ago and I believe their pricing may have changed. Because we had some $$ to start and the inflows seemed good enough to TRP, they were able to give us a "good deal" with no fees. I would expect that if you called today there would be some fees but perhaps could negotiate them away if the plan has assets already and a good number of employees.

Not sure if you are suggesting a generic fees page. I don't think that will tell me. I assume the fees are somewhat plan-specific (assets, people, etc).

I have been searching further and I found lots of plan documents with a few documents related to fees. Of course they are rather confusing and I still need to talk with someone to ask specific questions. At this point it seems like there are no direct costs to the company - I still see all $0's on the invoices - and the asset based fees on the funds (e.g., .27% on S&P 500 fund) AND it looks like a .25% administrative fee additional, but I need to verify all of this.

I would very much appreciate if you can list any fees once you figure it out.

+1 - I think there must be a $3k annual 5500 filing / administration fee tucked somewhere or someone would have suggested it by now over Emp Fiduciary.

Looks like it's better than I thought. My company has paid no fees (setup or yearly) and we don't even have an extra 25 basis points added - that is really an internal recordkeeping item whereas that 25 basis points comes out of the regular basis points charged on each fund (e.g., what "everyone" pays - like 27 basis points on the S&P fund). I confirmed all of this. We also pay nothing for filing and compliance.

The important notes here are that we did have about 20 employees when we started with money already rolled in from a former 401k and also we started several years ago and I believe their pricing may have changed. Because we had some $$ to start and the inflows seemed good enough to TRP, they were able to give us a "good deal" with no fees. I would expect that if you called today there would be some fees but perhaps could negotiate them away if the plan has assets already and a good number of employees.

Spirit Rider wrote:
I think you are being a little unrealistic to think that all TPA business models are going to offer all plan options available. The New Comparability Method is not exactly a requirement of the vast majority of plan sponsors. There is certainly a market for a TPAs to offer a simple low cost no frills safe harbor 401k plan to small businesses.

That is not to say I am endorsing them. They are fairly new and have only gained visibility on BH just this year. They do not yet have the longer track record of satisfied sponsors that Employee Fiduciary does.

That's fair. And again, I like their business model. Streamlining the plan provisions allows you to hire less experienced consultants and allows those consultants to administer more plans because they don't have to constantly go back and review the plan document. It just wasn't for my 401k plan.

I agree. I'm an early adopter, and I'm hoping the risk doesn't show up. The extra costs of EF and others elongated the benefit of just implementing a SIMPLE IRA, so it works for me.

I like the ROTH option that they give you. (For low income bracket years) Ubiquity and others don't provide that option without much higher costs.

For me, the risk is calculated and makes sense for my situation.

Do you know how many clients they serve and total funds they manage?

I was given the following link by a competitor, which says they only have 26 clients and only a little over $120k total they manage. I'm pretty sure that's wrong, I will inquire when I call them.

I took a quick look at this, and it was their original application. Likely from 2015. I believe I asked them this question and the numbers were far higher. I'd check with them directly. I figure they've now had 2 or 3 tax seasons of 5500 with their platform, which I think is fine for a small company for me. I use the founders other product too, so I have some confidence in this new venture. He created "TaskRabbit" which is very popular here in NYC.

Would I love to find someone on this board who uses them? Yes - But I may be the first and will report back end of the summer.

I've emailed guideline last night on the figures, haven't gotten a response yet. Do you know who files the 5500? Is that the only filing needed for a safe harbor 401k.

"The important notes here are that we did have about 20 employees when we started with money already rolled in from a former 401k and also we started several years ago and I believe their pricing may have changed. Because we had some $$ to start and the inflows seemed good enough to TRP, they were able to give us a "good deal" with no fees. I would expect that if you called today there would be some fees but perhaps could negotiate them away if the plan has assets already and a good number of employees."

We also transferred from one 401 provider to another. We considered a list of items that were important to us and the yearly fees were not on the top of that list but were a part of the overall costs we wanted to understand and make decisions with.
In many cases the fees imparted on the funds (either through AUM or with 'management fees' through the fund) become a much larger pieces of the puzzle and it is not apparent unless you simulate the portfolio for a year that it is reasonably populated.
Our list included:
- utilize many common low fee funds without extra admin fees on top
- track record of plan administrator
- Ease of use and customer interface
- Annual fees and employee fees

When you have/build a substantial amount of funds in the 401K you will find that the annual fee is a small percentage of the account and is also an expense for the company which is partly a write off. But when there are fees within the funds that are routed back to the plan administrator they build quickly when the balances rise and also affect each funds performance within the 401K.
I found it not too hard to get a 401K plan without any annual fees or any fees to the company at all - but getting at or near zero costs for the plan was not part of our goals. We wanted to have no extra cost 'drags' on our staff's accounts nor on ours with funds under the plan.

One more thought - is it really possible that these plan providers really charged lets say $800 total a year for a complete 10 person or so 401K platform?
I think not - its just that you need to make sure you are finding all of the costs and that those costs are acceptable to you in both the place they occur as well as the amounts.

So do they have any 12 b fees on the Funds you will be utilizing like the Admiral VG funds?
Without any further fees it looks like you will have $40 yearly plus 0.03 AUM fee (you and employees)
Did you mean to say 0.03% or is it 0.03AUM?

Smitcat- 3 basis points of admin. There were no other fees disclosed in their terms of service- but I will specifically ask about the 12b.

Spirit Rider wrote:
I think you are being a little unrealistic to think that all TPA business models are going to offer all plan options available. The New Comparability Method is not exactly a requirement of the vast majority of plan sponsors. There is certainly a market for a TPAs to offer a simple low cost no frills safe harbor 401k plan to small businesses.

That is not to say I am endorsing them. They are fairly new and have only gained visibility on BH just this year. They do not yet have the longer track record of satisfied sponsors that Employee Fiduciary does.

That's fair. And again, I like their business model. Streamlining the plan provisions allows you to hire less experienced consultants and allows those consultants to administer more plans because they don't have to constantly go back and review the plan document. It just wasn't for my 401k plan.

I agree. I'm an early adopter, and I'm hoping the risk doesn't show up. The extra costs of EF and others elongated the benefit of just implementing a SIMPLE IRA, so it works for me.

I like the ROTH option that they give you. (For low income bracket years) Ubiquity and others don't provide that option without much higher costs.

For me, the risk is calculated and makes sense for my situation.

Do you know how many clients they serve and total funds they manage?

I was given the following link by a competitor, which says they only have 26 clients and only a little over $120k total they manage. I'm pretty sure that's wrong, I will inquire when I call them.

I took a quick look at this, and it was their original application. Likely from 2015. I believe I asked them this question and the numbers were far higher. I'd check with them directly. I figure they've now had 2 or 3 tax seasons of 5500 with their platform, which I think is fine for a small company for me. I use the founders other product too, so I have some confidence in this new venture. He created "TaskRabbit" which is very popular here in NYC.

Would I love to find someone on this board who uses them? Yes - But I may be the first and will report back end of the summer.

I got a response....the competitor wasn't telling the truth. They have over 1,000 companies with over $50M in AUM.

"Smitcat- 3 basis points of admin. There were no other fees disclosed in their terms of service- but I will specifically ask about the 12b.
"I got a response....the competitor wasn't telling the truth. They have over 1,000 companies with over $50M in AUM."

I believe that $50M at 0.0003 is $15,000.
$40 X 1,000 = $40,000
You are both business folks - what do you think about this business's profit and future if these are the only fees?

Since being in business for myself I have watched for high costs on many places but have learned that too low costs are just as good an indicator of something that is/might/ will be a problem. They must be getting revenue back from the funds but I am not researching them myself so please check it out before you sign up.

smitcat wrote:"Smitcat- 3 basis points of admin. There were no other fees disclosed in their terms of service- but I will specifically ask about the 12b.
"I got a response....the competitor wasn't telling the truth. They have over 1,000 companies with over $50M in AUM."

I believe that $50M at 0.0003 is $15,000.
$40 X 1,000 = $40,000
You are both business folks - what do you think about this business's profit and future if these are the only fees?

Since being in business for myself I have watched for high costs on many places but have learned that too low costs are just as good an indicator of something that is/might/ will be a problem. They must be getting revenue back from the funds but I am not researching them myself so please check it out before you sign up.

Fair point.

My feeling is that much like many venture tech companies trying to break into the market, they will often break even or lose money in the short term to acquire market share. The team and CEO have launched other successful companies, (Task Rabbit) so for me, it's a calculated risk worth taking since a comparable plan from their competitors are 3-10xthe cost. I think they are targeting the 5-30 employees that other plans and competitors can't scale down to. I'm too small to throw $4,000 a year for a plan, so I'll just hope the risk doesn't show up and they succeed in what they are doing. I understand those who have bigger companies or more employees may want to look elsewhere, but for 5 employees in a state that only allows 401k contributions to be deducted the math works even for 5 employees.

My mileage may vary but I will report back to BH

Last edited by investor999 on Mon Mar 20, 2017 3:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

smitcat wrote:I believe that $50M at 0.0003 is $15,000.
$40 X 1,000 = $40,000
You are both business folks - what do you think about this business's profit and future if these are the only fees?

Since being in business for myself I have watched for high costs on many places but have learned that too low costs are just as good an indicator of something that is/might/ will be a problem. They must be getting revenue back from the funds but I am not researching them myself so please check it out before you sign up.

I've been following this thread with interest, as we might be setting up a small business 401k this year or next.

That calculation is not quite right, but the overall reasoning is probably good.

Their current yearly turnover is:
1. $50M x 0.0003 = $15,000
2. $40 x $1000 x average employees per company (minimum 5) = $200,000 at very minimum.
3. $500 x number of companies signed up per year = close to $500,000, since they haven't actually been actively marketed for much over a year.

That said, the average AUM per company is only $50k, so I'd imagine that item 2. isn't a lot more than $200k. Probably less than a $1M.

Only 0.1% of that market is still $4.4bn, which equates to AUM fees of $1.32M per year, plus admin fees of maybe something similar. If their fully automated system works perfectly, they will probably have good profits. If things go wrong and customers cannot get through, it could quickly fall apart.

"My feeling is that much like many venture tech companies trying to break into the market, they will often break even or lose money in the short term to acquire market share. The team and CEO have launched other successful companies, (Task Rabbit) so for me, it's a calculated risk worth taking since a comparable plan from their competitors are 3-10xthe cost."

Investor999 - you have posted this a few times now but each time I ask the exact costs (all of the costs) for the admin. players you are comparing as a simulation there are no posted numbers just things like 'much more' or 3-10 times the costs. We have moved from a much higher cost plan and we know how well some of these costs can be hidden- so please do your full research before following what is said on their website.

Here is where ours costs were about 2 years back with EF as a comparison....
$1,500 yearly for 14 employees - this gets paid by the company and is a tax write-off as an expense. Wish it were zero but I would rather have the costs here than in the actual funds.
$400 - 0.0008 times $500,000 for AUM paid by the accounts, shared by all participants equally based upon their account size.

$1,900 over about $500,000 - about 0.0038 which we pay less than half that after taxes out of our pockets gladly for us and our employees.

I do not work for EF , I do not really care if you use them or not, and I do want everyone here to get as good a deal or preferably better than we did. But....the yearly costs are usually used as a tease to get the account whereas some of the costs are not readily seen. Yes a company can say they do not collect a 'management fee' themselves and still get a 'rebate' back from the funds themselves leaving an extra cost to the 401K users.

If you can really get the full fund costs on the major funds you like at an acceptable level and have the choices you want then it is a great deal. I am just pointing out that the costs need to be described perfectly clear by these companies before you make your choice.
We made the choice based upon some costs consideration but also on the liability of what would happen if a problem arose from our vendor.
We like the 25 or so funds that we chose for our plan and know that they are low fee based funds with a wide appeal to most anyone interested in doing these types of savings/investing.
YMMV

Last edited by smitcat on Tue Mar 21, 2017 8:16 am, edited 1 time in total.

"That calculation is not quite right, but the overall reasoning is probably good."

Ethelred - you are absolutely correct my math was not even close, did not mean to misrepresent at all.
I have no intention of researching Guidline.com any more than I have the intention of defending anyone else.
Just wanted to make sure folks are 'discovering' all of the limitations and costs and where those costs lie before figuring out what is best for them.
FWIW - I would never tend to include set up costs in a company profit justification as they are usually losers based upon support and time except for architectures such as Ponzi schemes. If I have a vendor that delivers product XXX and their first time set up costs contribute meaningfully to their profit line my radar perks up immediately and the concern level rises a bunch.

This is what another, not available online, guideline.com document says about fees

Guideline charges plan sponsors a one-time fee of $200-700 to set up a 401(k) plan, and $6-$25 per month per plan participant, with a two-participant minimum. A final fee schedule is provided in the plan sponsor service agreement. Plan sponsors may cancel services with 60 days’ notice.Third-party plan custodians may also charge an annual maintenance fee after the first year. While fees charged to plan sponsors by Guideline may be negotiable, fees charged by a third-party plan custodian are non-negotiable.
Guideline does not charge 401(k) plan participants fees for plan administration or AUM. Guideline charges fees for individual services, including but not limited to, distributions after termination, required minimum distributions, hardship withdrawals, other in-service withdrawals, QDRO, loans, and wire/transfers. A schedule of fees is provided to participants in a fee disclosure statement.
Guideline charges IRA accounts 0.10% to 0.15% of AUM per month.

I am somewhat concerned with what I've bolded. To the poster (investor999) who said he already joined, did you get the fee disclosure statement like it says, you would get. Can you share that?

The link in your post doesn't work (corrected above), because you are copying and pasting to make quotes. Use the quotation mark button at the top of each post instead. It will automatically create quotes for you from the post that you're replying to.

And to answer your point, I think you'll find that it's simply that, like it says on the linked page, Guideline last updated their fund info 9/30/16. Many Vanguard funds have decreased their listed expense ratio since then, plus the time period for the average returns are now all six months later.

The link in your post doesn't work (corrected above), because you are copying and pasting to make quotes. Use the quotation mark button at the top of each post instead. It will automatically create quotes for you from the post that you're replying to.

And to answer your point, I think you'll find that it's simply that, like it says on the linked page, Guideline last updated their fund info 9/30/16. Many Vanguard funds have decreased their listed expense ratio since then, plus the time period for the average returns are now all six months later.

I have an email to them to get some clarity on this. The website and my contract lists .29, but the document from 9/16/16 lists .34. They also do now carry Total Bond US which that doc is missing for those sticking to a Lazy portfolio flavor.

Total Stock Market Admiral is .05 in all locations (Website, TOS, and their 9/16 doc.

I am still planning on reaching out to TRowe for their costs and will post my findings on 4-5 401k vendors for a small company.

So it sounds like you have a doc in your possession that is accurate and part of a potential contract - that is good.
That allows you to simulate what your actual costs will be for the plan year based upon your expected population and transactions.
You are good to go in your evaluation - we cannot help much since the data you have is not available on line at this point.
Good luck in whatever path you choose

I've seen this document and it outlines the fees as they advertised. I think the application site in the previous post may have outdated information from their original application.

Have you checked with them about the document you found? I have not signed up yet but was planning to after I confirmed all the fees were as advertised.

If it truly is .03% AUM plus Admiral Share ER prices, it would seem hard to beat. (Assuming their administration is up to par).

Any other red flags for you at the moment?

No red flags except I am still concerned they are not making profit and far from doing so. I still think there is a possibility they could go under. I'm being told they generated $7M in venture capital (have not confirmed it). I would love for someone with knowledge on how to evaluate a start up to shed light on their survivability.

Then what happens if they do go bankrupt? I understand the funds are safe. But, what's the logistics behind it. What if I can't reach anyone at guideline. Their custodian is 'Benedit Trust Company', do I call them to transfer fund to a new 401k company I've chosen?

The link in your post doesn't work (corrected above), because you are copying and pasting to make quotes. Use the quotation mark button at the top of each post instead. It will automatically create quotes for you from the post that you're replying to.

And to answer your point, I think you'll find that it's simply that, like it says on the linked page, Guideline last updated their fund info 9/30/16. Many Vanguard funds have decreased their listed expense ratio since then, plus the time period for the average returns are now all six months later.

I have an email to them to get some clarity on this. The website and my contract lists .29, but the document from 9/16/16 lists .34. They also do now carry Total Bond US which that doc is missing for those sticking to a Lazy portfolio flavor.

Total Stock Market Admiral is .05 in all locations (Website, TOS, and their 9/16 doc.

I am still planning on reaching out to TRowe for their costs and will post my findings on 4-5 401k vendors for a small company.

Id love to know what you find out with T Rowe Price. I've had funds in my IRA with them before and it's an excellent company. If all I need is low cost index funds, they could be a great choice, especially if they are not charging any fees.

gilgamesh wrote:Id love to know what you find out with T Rowe Price. I've had funds in my IRA with them before and it's an excellent company. If all I need is low cost index funds, they could be a great choice, especially if they are not charging any fees.

I'm not sure I'd class their index funds as "low cost", at least not compared to Vanguard/Fidelity/Schwab. The net ER on investor class index funds starts at 0.25% for S&P500, and rises pretty quickly. Only three US stock funds have ER below 0.64%. For a 401k of, say, $50k, that's $125/year and $320/year respectively. There are much worse fees out there, but that is already more than guideline's charges per employee plus their mean fund ER, even if you assume there are no other fees at TRP.

As an extra reply - I just checked the TRP website. Their Individual 401k says "No annual employer fees or set-up cost." , while their Small Business 401k says "Small Business 401(k) fees vary by plan". If you (or you and your spouse) are the only employee, there are several suppliers out there with cheaper index funds than TRP.

Ethelred wrote:As an extra reply - I just checked the TRP website. Their Individual 401k says "No annual employer fees or set-up cost." , while their Small Business 401k says "Small Business 401(k) fees vary by plan". If you (or you and your spouse) are the only employee, there are several suppliers out there with cheaper index funds than TRP.

+1

If all you need is a Solo 401k even vanguard is an option. It's far less of a hassle than a safe harbor 401k. There's far less admin and requirements.